The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My WebLink AboutTHE LODGE AT MIRAMONT PUD - PRELIMINARY - 54-87AP - MINUTES/NOTES - CORRESPONDENCE-NEIGHBORHOOD MEETINGNEIGHBORHOOD MEETING MINUTES PROJECT: APPLICANT: CONSULTANT: PLANNER: DATE: The Lodge at Miramont Preliminary P.U.D. Sollenberger Development Corporation c/o Mike Sollenberger Mr. Frank Vaught, V-F Ripley and Associates Ted Shepard, Chief Planner February 8, 2000 PROJECT DESCRIPTION The meeting began with a description of the proposed project. The request is for 132 condominium dwelling units located in three-story buildings. As proposed, there would be 12 units per building and a total of 11 buildings. There would be one additional building for an office and community room. There would be 44 one-bedroom units and 88 two-bedroom units. The one-bedroom units would be about 800 square feet and offered at roughly $90,000 and the two-bedroom units would be about 1,200 square feet and offered at roughly $140,000. The height of the structures would be 39 feet which is under the 40 foot height maximum. The closest buildings would be 60 feet from Lemay and 55 feet from Boardwalk. The existing stormwater retention pond is located within the property. There would be three kinds of parking, attached garage, detached garage, and surface parking. The project is being reviewed as a Planned Unit Development under the Land Development Guidance System (L.D.G.S.). Density is determined by the perFormance on the Residential Point Chart where a minimum score under base and variable criteria must be achieved. It is not a"City Plan" project that would be reviewed by the new (1997) Land Use Code (L.U.C.). QUESTIONS, CONCERNS, COMMENTS (Unless otherwise noted, all responses are from the applicant's consultant.) The project is too dense and out of character for our neighborhood. I am opposed to three-story buildings. What is the zoning of the property? Does the zoning allow for the amount of proposed density? A. The site was rezoned in 1997 as part of the City Plan adoption process to M-M-N, Medium Density Mixed-Use Neighborhood. Under City Plan, this would require a minimum of 12 dwelling units per net acre (as opposed to gross acre). As mentioned, however, this request is being reviewed under the L.D.G.S. where our proposed density is supported by our score on the applicable point chart. 2. I believe your comparison to the required minimum density of 12 dwelling units per net acre as called for in the M-M-N zone is misleading. Doesn't this required minimum get reduced to 7.00 dwelling units per acre if the project is considered to be in an "infill" location? A. Response from City Planner: Yes, the L.U.C. allows for the required minimum density in the M-M-N zone to be reduced for projects located in the "infill" area. This area is defined to be east of Timberline Road and north of Harmony Road. Since this project is south of Harmony, the requirement under M-M-N zoning would be to develop at no less than 12 dwelling units per net acre. 3. How high is Collinwood Assisted Living Center? I recall during the approval process for Collinwood that the City promised the structure would not exceed the 40 foot height maximum. Instead, the building exceeds the allowable maximum and the City had to grant a variance. The Oak Ridge neighborhood opposed the variance and we got stuck with the additional height. A. I am not sure of the exact height of Collinwood facility. Keep in mind that the Collinwood facility is a gymnasium. In contrast, our buildings are residential structures and are oriented on the site differently than Collinwood. 4. The buildings are too high. I don't care if they are residential or not and I don't care which way they are oriented. They are out of scale and proportion with our neighborhood. We live in Oak Ridge and the proposal is an insult to us. 5. I live on White Oak Court in Oak Ridge. I'm concerned about drainage. The Miramont detention pond at the corner of Lemay and Boardwalk drains into a swale that runs through Oak Ridge. We are responsible for maintaining this swale. Will the existing pond be large enough to handle the stormwater runoff associated with the project? Will our swale be impacted causing us more maintenance headaches? 2 A. Our proposal will be reviewed by the City's Stormwater Department. We are required to detain for the 100-year storm and limit our stormwater releases to not exceed the historic rate. The City will be reviewing our proposal. 6. Can the pond, which is on the developer's property, be counted towards open space and thereby earn credit on the density point chart? A. Response from City: No, the pond cannot be counted towards open space. It can be counted, however, as part of the gross acreage for the purpose of calculating the density. 7. So far, we have heard great displeasure from the folks in Oak Ridge. We live north and west of the proposal in The Courtyards at Miramont. What measures have been taken to mitigate the impact on us? A. Our proposal does not abut the Courtyards at Miramont. You folks back up to the park which will be permanent open space. Please note that the buildings are "stair-stepped" down on the ends to two-story so we do not have the three-story height on our property line. 8. Will there be enough parking? We do not want cars spilling over onto Boardwalk. A. We are providing 233 parking spaces which exceeds the City's required minimum. 9. How many of these spaces are in garages? A. We are providing 76 garage spaces. 10. You are putting one building extremely close to the "viewing hill" in Miramont Park. Does this create a safety hazard for kids who are sledding? A. There is flat area between our property line and the hill. Kids can also sled going north rather than east towards us. 11. I'm concerned about traffic. What will happen at the Lemay/Boardwalk intersection? A. The City's Traffic Operations Engineer will upgrade the signal to a full- cycle signal rather than just a pedestrian-actuated signal. We have been told there is capacity at the intersection to accommodate this proposal. 12. What about capacity at Werner Elementary and Preston Junior High? All south side schools are at capacity. A. Response from City: We work closely with Poudre School District. They have been aware of the residential build-out of Oak-Cottonwood Farm Overall Development Plan (270 acres) since 1987. Our experience is that multi-family projects do not generate as many school-age children as would single family homes. There is capacity in the School District in other neighborhoods and the District reserves the right to bus kids from new subdivisions to schools with capacity. 13. I'm concerned about the ultimate build-out of Oak-Cottonwood Farm. It appears to me that the actual build-out will exceed the anticipated number of dwelling units as called for on the Overall Development Plan (O.D.P.). Both Miramont Apartments and The Hamlet condos came in over the expected density. Now, you are proposing to exceed the anticpated density shown on Parcel N. The result is over-densification and too much impact associated with the proposed development. I estimate there to be 44% increase in density in the O.D.P. as a result of The Lodge. This means too much traffic on our streets, too much usage in our neighborhood park and too many students in our schools. My conclusion is that The Lodge is radically out of character for our neighborhood and I oppose the project. A. Response from City: Keep in mind that over the 13-year history of Oak- Cottonwood Farm, density has shifted around among the parcels due to changes in market conditions. For example, Boardwalk Drive was shifted to the east to allow for larger lots in the single family area of Miramont. Castle Ridge is an example. Also, larger lots were platted on the south side of Mail Creek Ditch because it is a ridgeline and there are views to the southwest. Finally, O.D.P's were not intended to be exact predictors of future density. In fact, there is a qualifier note on all O.D.P.'s that final density is determined on a project-by-project basis based on performance on the Residential Uses Point Chart of the L.D.G.S., not by the O.D.P. 14. We in Oak Ridge will lose our views to the west. Have you provided for any view corridors through the project? A. There are no significant view corridors. This is something we can consider. 15. Why is the density so high? Is there a city-mandated minimum? A. Response from City: The only mandated minimum is that on a gross acreage basis, for all residential parcels in Miramont, there can be no less than 3.00 dwelling units per acre. Also, Parcel N must develop as "multi- 4 family" or "business services" or apply to the Planning and Zoning Board for a master plan amendment. 16. Has an analysis been done regarding how Miramont is building out? Is Miramont in need of this much density to bring it up to the 3.00 d.u./a minimum? A. Response from City: No, this analysis has not been done at this time. We can look into this and provide the information. 17. From my perspective, it appears the developer is really jamming these buildings in close together. Combined with the three-story buildings, it demonstrates a total disregard for the quality of life for the surrounding neighborhoods. The proposal is inconsiderate. 18. Why is there no direct access to the project from Lemay? Wouldn't this alleviate congestion at the Lemay/Boardwalk intersection? A. We have been instructed by the City's traffic operations engineer that access off Lemay would not be allowed. We have a shown an emergency second point of access to comply with the request of the Poudre Fire Authority. This access will be blocked by a chain or by bollards. 19. With only one access point, there will be cars backed up into the project waiting to exit during the morning rush hour. This will cause residents to park on Boardwalk overnight. This will be undesirable to have parked cars up and down Boardwalk in our neighborhood. 20. For cars that are eastbound on Boardwalk, wanting to turn left to go north on Lemay, they will stack up and block the access point to the project. This will create gridlock and cause driver frustration. A. We will work with the City's traffic operations engineer to see if there is enough stacking capacity in the left turn lane. 21. Why don't you eliminate all top floors and just have two-story buildings? You could delete all the one-bedroom apartments and only lose 22 dwelling units. 22. Was the future Keenland extension over the railroad tracks factored into the traffic study? A. Do not know. We will ask the traffic consultant and report back. 5 23. I live on Lemay and Keenland. I'm concerned about drainage. All the runoff will go down our swale on its way to the large Oak Ridge pond next to the railroad tracks. I'm disappointed that the City Stormwater Engineers are not at this meeting to address our concerns. A. Response from City: We are in the preliminary planning stage of this project. We can certainly meet again and bring representatives from other departments and utilities to answer your questions. 24. The existing stormwater detention pond in Miramont is a nuisance. The bottom of the pond is below the outlet. The water gets stagnant and mosquitoes breed. It attracts kids. Do you plan on improving this situation? A. Yes, we would like to improve the pond with aeration and better shoreline landscaping. This should improve water quality. 25. Keep in mind that the pond is naturally fed by high groundwater. Some believe that this is a result of leakage from the Mail Creek Ditch. A. We do not want to add to the problems. We recognize that the downstream property owners in Oak Ridge have a maintenance obligation to convey the stormwater generated by Miramont. 26. Three-story buildings are totally unexpected. We knew the parcel would develop in some fashion but never did we expect such massive buildings. 27. There is too much traffic on Boardwalk already. Drivers regularly exceed the posted speed limit. Boardwalk is a unique collector because it is a short-cut to South College Avenue. I am concerned because of kids walking to Werner School. The project will just make Boardwalk a more dangerous street. A. Have you considered working with the City on installing traffic calming devices? The City has a program to work with neighborhoods on reducing speeding. Also, the City works with the School District every year on the "Safe Route to Schools" program on where to install yellow caution lights and/or crossing guards. 28. Have you ever sat through the traffic signal at Harmony and Boardwalk? If you are going north on Boardwalk and want to turn left to go west on Harmony, you end up waiting through several cycles. How can the City allow this much density and force drivers onto a system that is already having problems? � A. One of the problems with Harmony Road is that it is under the jurisdiction of the State. As a highway connection between I-25 and State Highway 287, the State is reluctant to lower the speed limits. So, the green phase for Harmony is longer than for Boardwalk. 29. We live in Courtyards at Miramont next to the park. The park has drainage problems. We had to install a sump pump in our basement. The soccer field does not drain. How can we trust the City Stormwater engineers on this project? A. 30 ,A. 31 A. Our project does not slope towards Courtyards. Our drainage goes east into the existing pond. If the Oak-Cottonwood Farm O.D.P. needs this much density to achieve the required minimum of 3.00 d.u./a, can this requirement be varied? Response from City: It can only be varied by the Planning and Zoning Board. Was this project originally submitted for only 88 units? Yes. 32. We oppose the three-story height. This will cause sound on Lemay to reflect back towards Oak Ridge. The height is out of character for our neighborhood and we fear our property values will suffer as a result. � 33 0 We believe that with the setbacks from Lemay, there will be no sound reflectance back to Oak Ridge. We live in Courtyards at Miramont. The irrigation pond for Miramont Park is stagnant and carries a foul odor. Again, our drainage will go east. The pond you are referring to is west of our site. 34. Would the developer take the project through the planning process as condos and then switch to apartments after approval? This has been known to happen. I_1 35 It is not the intention of the developer to do this. Can the City enforce that the units remain condos? 7 A. Response from City: We cannot review a plan based on the potential ownership-versus-rental aspect of the individual dwelling units. Type of ownership is not a land use review criterion. 36. Will there be an association for maintenance, mowing, etc.? A. Yes. 37. Would you want to live on Keenland if this project were approved? 38. I am opposed to the density. Multi-family will lower our property values. I criticize the City for not having a representative from the Parks and Recreation Department to address our concerns about the problems at Miramont Park. A. Response from City: We can have a follow-up meeting and have a member of the Park Planning and Development Staff in attendance. 39. The project is incompatible due to the density. The City should relax whatever requirement is forcing the developer to propose 132 dwelling units. If there is such a requirement, it is too rigid. The third floor of each building should be eliminated. A. Response from City: Our only requirements are that Oak-Cottonwood O.D.P. not fall below 3.00 d.u./a on a gross acreage basis and that whatever density is proposed is supported by the performance on the Residential Uses Point Chart of the L.D.G.S. 40. The Planning Department provided inadequate notice for this meeting. The green sign should be larger because the project is now over 100 units. Also, the mailing list should go out at least 1,000 feet not 750 feet. A. Response from City: We will make these corrections and hold another neighborhood meeting to provide follow-up for those questions we cannot answer tonight. 41. Have you seen what Boardwalk looks like during soccer season? The park is full from 4:00 to 7:00 p.m. and cars line the street. And now you are going to add 132 new units with only one access point off Boardwalk. This will just bring more traffic into our neighborhood onto a street where there is already too much speeding. 42. Has the developer completed other projects in Fort Collins that we can inspect? A. Yes, he completed the Medical Center at Prospect and Lemay and Harbor Walk Estates on the east side of Warren Lake. He has also completed other multi-family and senior housing projects in other communities as well as a luxury apartment project in Boulder. 43. Will each unit pay full building permit fees? A. Yes. 44. Regarding overall density in the neighborhood, how do you factor in the assisted living facility on Rule Drive? A. Response from City: That is considered institutional housing and not individual dwelling units. Also, it is not a part of Oak-Cottonwood Farm O.D.P. 45. Unless the developer can eliminate some buildings and lower the height, I can only oppose the project and urge the Planning and Zoning Board to do the same. 46. Where do we go from here? I have concerns about the notice for this meeting. We want an explanation from City about the project's score on the point chart and the All Development Criteria. The developer needs to re-orient the buildings to provide view corridors for Oak Ridge. We want more opportunities to participate in the process. The developer should know that three-story buildings are not compatible. A. Response from City: We can hold another at-large neighborhood meeting. In addition, we can meet with representatives from the various home owners' associations on a continuing basis. Meeting in smaller groups on a more frequent basis has worked well for other neighborhoods facing similar issues. Finally, our Neighborhood Resources Office is available to assist your neighborhoods in organizing. 47. How do these buildings compare in height and mass to the Collinwood gym? A. Our building footprint is 130' x 58'. We are not exactly sure of the dimensions of the Collinwood gym but we will provide this information at the next meeting. 48. The fact that the proposed buildings are larger than the Collinwood gym demonstrates the lack of compatibility with the neighborhood. The proposed buildings are more massive than the largest building in our neighborhood. Could you put the building closest to Lemay in perspective � drawing so we can evaluate how the building looks in relationship to the street? A. Yes, we can prepare a perspective drawing. 49. Did the traffic study factor in a new use in the old Builders Square? What if this building is converted into a new retail use? Does this change the traffic analysis? A. I am fairly certain that the traffic study assumed a fully occupied building as a retail use but I will check with the traffic consultant to be sure. 50. We live in the Courtyards at Miramont and oppose the project. Our backyards do not drain and our water table is high. We had to install a sump pump. There are drainage problems in the whole area. This project will just make things worse. 51. Is the Residential Uses point chart of the L.D.G.S. the only review criteria for this project? A. Response from City: No, the project must also satisfy the applicable All Development Criteria of the L.D.G.S. and all the review criteria of the Fort Collins Utilities and outside utility providers such as Public Service and U.S. West. 10 NEIGHBQRHOQD �:� �ORI1'1ATION IYIEETING . Did you receive Correct ; . ' written notification Address . , ' ; . ; ... > �.: _: , ,; ZIP � ,�; �..,; .; - CODE of this meeting? N�ME A.DDRESS YES NO YES NO �--. .%�� C _ � / � - : G' �I.� � ' < ,� , � f�iZ �' " � �-- , - - . - � �, ,.��:._� ��: , J ��' . �. � si�"� // � � � ' 1� _�-4? ' �� - ,'G�_ 1_, � �• / —r .L9� ! w �% G � � '.r.fi3`I � � � eC � . . . �j _ ��i ��T��G �� C � � � ; �.�� , l�� n � � � ✓ at��,L�' .' ��c�. � ('� J��N�rc�� " � _ +� ris {� S. 7�2 �✓• Dr�..�{ l2d . �QS�26 � . �...�� v ��' ��%�� ,3� - I ��/ � � i' z3 � �;•�l;�g�� L d'As 2 ✓' � � �~ � 7� 1/< �G" 'Ql l % / � i l�:.L (.�� 6 �;, � � t� �G S� ✓ � � ` � S�� l Sc�,� �s C�.�-�-- �O��S ✓ . �' �� Sll i,�l v � C . �'> ✓ ✓ I 1 J i iL� � j� F%� ( � � , �.� 'tn.� ,'� �t 2,2 �_ � 4yt�'.� -�S L--� 1 '.�� n � i�� 7� � T �< G� _ ��(�' 't ,� i /: �/✓ �j, .� �J i/�' : / rJ G'' t � � � - � � S� � s � s� �z�� r�>�,�� -�,e � c� � �� , .—, . �-��. . �CC��,�' ��. �'��. /�� , �'/��,c'� y � �c�� , � _ �� {t�i�^�''7C// � �:r2�J -f-3 YG'O �' 17`�.i<< ,"JL(/ ,JJ�C. � :�"C.c �✓�GJ 1 �l• � (�'�� i�(%d Q/(GVU✓ ��"�' "'' � . T � � � Q,�i� � � � t ��-�t �� 'P e � � � � l�.r � Oa-�-- �'szs V L -; � , , — ' I � (�. �� :� ��- b� �,��, � �r e� a - � i� tc �v� �c`� >l�/��3�1-� -%�� — �-C� f�� i�� j�,�°! ,..r�� E� ��%� .;�,.,,.,�-� �c�'�.'_ �,s�: �GS Z.� �� v� 7� NEIC3HBQRHOQD ��R11'�ATI�N MEETINCs> Didyonr�ive Correct ; , , , Z� writtennotifcation Address? ' CODE of this meeting? Np,ME ADDRESS YES NO YES NO i , . � � � , ' )��. ,�� i'�� C � � � L � ` ,- � , �- ; , . 2 �` � i t/ � C %G C' . ��.% ' � , � �- �1��, . � � I I q �� ►1�tr- U, C�- � ��.� 2;� E/. 1� 7y,v' - �.c,d �S ,�.�� / �C� .�-c�> . �� ''� ��s Z.� . Li � t/ ��z�� u,b�r� llv`% j w,�h��'� Gt �'�'z `-� . '� �. ' �z ` ' , � � _ ; :� � , � �.�� . ; _ �- � � aa�� '� � � Z a '' �.--�- �" � � �g �itil��L SI �� aF�-PDw�Y( lC �� L � � � . ; � � ". . C7 � 7. � � f / / I' � �� 1 f � � � � c � d q � � r� ' �� I `'� ��i; `.�c '�L = _� � C%� � i �l � {.�.� � r,�� ;- f� � /� ,- �j � r� a � ��J 1 � I � � �'L � � �.i. � 'r1 �L��_ � i� -+� � � °_ �l � . � �, � -z - � C� � �G� zs � ✓ ✓ � I �_ � � � �.�� 5 � n. � - �_�� a--�--- � � Z � �✓ � � �� k�� 1 `�,�i ,� � � /�� ,-��C' � �:'�;�� ' ��-zs- � � , �, `,. � � �; � , . � � ' � � � �.�c ' .%G� CC}; c�� C _ i5�`i � �; �vfi -S�a" �%'�,c �- � /.:Z / v �?�,C� C�a�� ,� � � /,� � � G-� � l n1 �f�ry �Z� / 41 l cI��IJ uFl-�K � � �� zS ✓ � � P� � s � Ns��,� . i T� c� � � �' � ��.�5 ✓ � , nn, k�1 N�r�5�ti1 / � l � �T.` � �'�`-. 1�- .. � /i��'r " ; :� �G"__ l�i��j�;_ �'�� '%"�� SO `� DFi-=U �u�'kk'r,c.��-2 l�, �' ��' � � / 1 �� c,� r n; � �c�:r��s, S � �' ��-� +� rz..o�.� r.+� � 0 r� -%- Z "� �S bS2 - '� `-_: � (,I,w�. n'L C��_ l(�' (� t;;; �< l�c l.� ("� �p�'�.s- �,/' r.Y�;J�-v�r V �s_��-.-,� _ , j L`00 l�v't=�c�zxr-r�_�.kL ��:� �T �-L� 1 �il'~��.� � l,% ✓ NEIGHBQI2T3C?QD IN��R:'1'S�.Z,'I�N �IEETING ; Did you r�i�e Correct , , ; ° dress ' , '. ,; Z� writtea n tif cation Ad � > CODE of this meecing? NAME ADDRESS YES NO YES NO � 1 �� j . . � / � /�� r- ��- C.r �C. "� <� 1 ��l � l-%'.f ��i V ''.- "r'� �I �.l . � � `v . �� Y t`i � �� / TE �i'� � � 4 S2 �` . � i � I . i � I I I . � I